Citation Nr: 1322882	
Decision Date: 07/18/13    Archive Date: 07/24/13

DOCKET NO.  09-35 196	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery, Alabama


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to a disability evaluation in excess of 20 percent for diabetes mellitus, type II.  


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

D. M. Ames, Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran had active service from June 1970 to January 1972.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2007 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama.  

A review of the Virtual VA paperless claims processing system does not reveal any additional documents pertinent to the present appeal.

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

While the Board regrets the further delay that a remand of this case will cause, the record is not ready for appellate review of the issue on appeal.  The following further development is required. 

In the April 2013 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC), the RO stated that VA treatment records from August 20, 2009 to April 5, 2013 were electronically reviewed prior to the readjudication of the Veteran's claim.  These VA treatment records have not been associated with the Veteran's paper claims file nor with his electronic claims file in the Virtual VA paperless claims processing system.  Therefore the Board does not have access to them.  These records must be associated with either the Veteran's paper or electronic claims files.  See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992). 

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records that may exist, including those from August 20, 2009 to April 5, 2013, and make them available in either the Veteran's paper claims file or his electronic claims file in the Virtual VA paperless claims processing system.  If the records are unavailable, the claims folder must indicate this fact and the Veteran should be notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e) (2012).  The notice must contain the following information: (1) the identity of the records that could not be obtained, (2) an explanation of efforts made to obtain the records, (3) a description of any further action that will be taken including notice that VA will decide the claim based upon evidence of record unless the Veteran submits records that VA was unable to obtain and (4) notice that the Veteran is ultimately responsible for providing the evidence. 

2. Thereafter, and after undertaking any additional development deemed necessary, readjudicate the issue on appeal.  If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, in whole or in part, the Veteran and his representative should be provided with a Supplemental Statement of the Case and be afforded reasonable opportunity to respond.  The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. 

The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).



							(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment.  The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).



________________________________________________
S. L. Kennedy
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.  This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).